<HTML>
<HEAD>
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=us-ascii">
<TITLE>
    CWG Issue 1382</TITLE>
<meta name="viewport" content="width=device-width, initial-scale=1.0">
<STYLE TYPE="text/css">
  INS { text-decoration:none; font-weight:bold; background-color:#A0FFA0 }
  .INS { text-decoration:none; background-color:#D0FFD0 }
  DEL { text-decoration:line-through; background-color:#FFA0A0 }
  .DEL { text-decoration:line-through; background-color: #FFD0D0 }
  @media (prefers-color-scheme: dark) {
    HTML { background-color:#202020; color:#f0f0f0; }
    A { color:#5bc0ff; }
    A:visited { color:#c6a8ff; }
    A:hover, a:focus { color:#afd7ff; }
    INS { background-color:#033a16; color:#aff5b4; }
    .INS { background-color: #033a16; }
    DEL { background-color:#67060c; color:#ffdcd7; }
    .DEL { background-color:#67060c; }
  }
  SPAN.cmnt { font-family:Times; font-style:italic }
</STYLE>
</HEAD>
<BODY>
<P><EM>This is an unofficial snapshot of the ISO/IEC JTC1 SC22 WG21
  Core Issues List revision 118b.
  See http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/ for the official
  list.</EM></P>
<P>2025-09-28</P>
<HR>
<A NAME="1382"></A><H4>1382.
  
Dead code for constructor names
</H4>
<B>Section: </B>9.3&#160; [<A href="https://wg21.link/dcl.decl">dcl.decl</A>]
 &#160;&#160;&#160;

 <B>Status: </B>CD3
 &#160;&#160;&#160;

 <B>Submitter: </B>Johannes Schaub
 &#160;&#160;&#160;

 <B>Date: </B>2011-08-27<BR>


<P>[Moved to DR at the October, 2012 meeting.]</P>



<P>
<A HREF="147.html">Issue 147</A> changed the name lookup rules
so that a lookup that would have found the injected-class-name of a
class will refer to the constructor.  However, there still appear to
be vestiges of the earlier specification that were not removed by
the resolution.  For example, the grammar in 9.3 [<A href="https://wg21.link/dcl.decl#4">dcl.decl</A>] paragraph 4
contains,</P>

<UL>
<I>declarator-id:</I>
<UL>
<TT>...</TT><I><SUB>opt</SUB> id-expression</I><BR>
<I>nested-name-specifier<SUB>opt</SUB> class-name</I>
</UL>
</UL>

<P>It would seem that there is no longer any need for the second
line, since a lookup for a <I>declarator-id</I> will not produce
a <I>class-name</I>.  Similarly, _N4567_.5.1.1 [<A href="https://wg21.link/expr.prim.general#8">expr.prim.general</A>] paragraph 8
still contains the sentence,</P>

<BLOCKQUOTE>

Where <I>class-name</I> <TT>::</TT> <I>class-name</I> is used,
and the two <I>class-name</I>s refer to the same class, this
notation names the constructor (11.4.5 [<A href="https://wg21.link/class.ctor">class.ctor</A>]).

</BLOCKQUOTE>

<P><B>Proposed resolution (February, 2012):</B></P>

<OL>
<LI><P>Change 9.3 [<A href="https://wg21.link/dcl.decl#4">dcl.decl</A>] paragraph 4 as follows:</P></LI>

<BLOCKQUOTE>

<UL>...<BR>
<I>declarator-id:</I>
<UL>
<TT>...</TT><I><SUB>opt</SUB> id-expression</I><BR>
<DEL><I>nested-name-specifier<SUB>opt</SUB> class-name</I></DEL>

</UL>

</UL>

<P><DEL>A <I>class-name</I> has special meaning in a declaration of the
class of that name and when qualified by that name using the scope
resolution operator <TT>::</TT> (5.1 [<A href="https://wg21.link/lex.separate">lex.separate</A>],
11.4.5 [<A href="https://wg21.link/class.ctor">class.ctor</A>], 11.4.7 [<A href="https://wg21.link/class.dtor">class.dtor</A>]).</DEL></P>

</BLOCKQUOTE>

<LI><P>Change _N4567_.5.1.1 [<A href="https://wg21.link/expr.prim.general#8">expr.prim.general</A>] paragraph 8 as follows:</P></LI>

<BLOCKQUOTE>

...[<I>Note:</I> a class member can be referred to using a
<I>qualified-id</I> at any point in its potential scope (6.4.7 [<A href="https://wg21.link/basic.scope.class">basic.scope.class</A>]). &#8212;<I>end note</I>] <DEL>Where <I>class-name</I>
<TT>::</TT> <I>class-name</I> is used, and the two <I>class-name</I>s
refer to the same class, this notation names the constructor
(11.4.5 [<A href="https://wg21.link/class.ctor">class.ctor</A>]).</DEL> Where <I>class-name</I>
<TT>::~</TT>
<I>class-name</I> is used...

</BLOCKQUOTE>

</OL>

<BR><BR>
</BODY>
</HTML>
